Well I won't. Sadly there's usually so few congress critter candidates for my area that it's impossible to vote for anything other than Derpocrat or Republitard, and maybe a rare Green Party candidate that's loonier than both traditional parties combined. Can't say I'm really surprised though, politics has long since ceased being about representing your constituents if it ever really was in the US.

AngryDragon:lennavan: AngryDragon: lennavan: m00: Once again Stewart shows he's the only real journalist left. And he's a comedian. How sad is that?

[upload.wikimedia.org image 250x250]

[images.encyclopediadramatica.se image 500x389]

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 468x286]

Objectivity (journalism)Objectivity is a significant principle of journalistic professionalism. Journalistic objectivity can refer to fairness, disinterestedness, factuality, and nonpartisanship, but most often encompasses all of these qualities.

Reality has a liberal bias. Whether you like it or not. Perhaps you should re-read those wiki definitions.

d_lebowski:AngryDragon: lennavan: AngryDragon: lennavan: m00: Once again Stewart shows he's the only real journalist left. And he's a comedian. How sad is that?

[upload.wikimedia.org image 250x250]

[images.encyclopediadramatica.se image 500x389]

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 468x286]

Objectivity (journalism)Objectivity is a significant principle of journalistic professionalism. Journalistic objectivity can refer to fairness, disinterestedness, factuality, and nonpartisanship, but most often encompasses all of these qualities.

Reality has a liberal bias. Whether you like it or not. Perhaps you should re-read those wiki definitions.

Since I have some background in journalism. I can tell you that no, no it does not. Walter Kronkite was a journalist and he's spinning in his grave. The talking heads on CNN, FOX, MSNBC, et. al. rarely act like journalists.

AngryDragon:Objectivity is a significant principle of journalistic professionalism. Journalistic objectivity can refer to fairness, disinterestedness, factuality, and nonpartisanship, but most often encompasses all of these qualities.

Partisan (political)In politics, a partisan is a committed member of a political party.

If President Obama happened to glance at "The Rachel Maddow Show" last Monday, he might have winced. Ms. Maddow pretended to celebrate the passage of a health care overhaul bill in the House, calling it "potentially a huge generational win for the Democratic Party" - but then halted the triumphant music and called it an "electoral defeat."The Stupak amendment, she said, was "the biggest restriction on abortion rights in a generation." Then she wondered aloud about the consequences for Democrats "if they don't get women or anybody who's pro-choice to ever vote for them again." She returned to the subject the next four evenings in a row.

Maddow criticizes Obama's view on gay marriage Rachel Maddow made a comment on her MSNBC show - a comment which invited a backlash Maddow could not have expected."Obama is against what just happened" she said, to express that the president had not supported marriage equality; something Maddow has pointed out numerous times.

AngryDragon:lennavan: AngryDragon: lennavan: m00: Once again Stewart shows he's the only real journalist left. And he's a comedian. How sad is that?

[upload.wikimedia.org image 250x250]

[images.encyclopediadramatica.se image 500x389]

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 468x286]

Objectivity (journalism)Objectivity is a significant principle of journalistic professionalism. Journalistic objectivity can refer to fairness, disinterestedness, factuality, and nonpartisanship, but most often encompasses all of these qualities.

No. The idea the "objectivity" means the assumption that both sides are equally valid is wrong, and it's the reason we spent about 6 years having to listen to the supposedly equally valid alternate version of reality wherein the president was born in Kenya.

Uranus Is Huge!:I thought the real story was John Oliver's piece about politics in Australia.

Well, the piece was about politics in America, using Australia as something to compare to. The best part of the piece was the "Q: What makes a politician successful? A: Getting re-elected..." exchange where the guy clearly recognized why that was a terrible answer and wished he could take it back.

AngryDragon:lennavan: AngryDragon: lennavan: m00: Once again Stewart shows he's the only real journalist left. And he's a comedian. How sad is that?

[upload.wikimedia.org image 250x250]

[images.encyclopediadramatica.se image 500x389]

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 468x286]

Objectivity (journalism)Objectivity is a significant principle of journalistic professionalism. Journalistic objectivity can refer to fairness, disinterestedness, factuality, and nonpartisanship, but most often encompasses all of these qualities.

This. Maddow is one of, if not the best opinion journalists out there. Opinion journalist. Opinion. Calling her fair and balanced is as laughable as calling Fox News fair and balanced.

Source4leko:Calling her fair and balanced is as laughable as calling Fox News fair and balanced.

Equating Maddow to Fox News is as laughable as equating Fark.com to PBS.

Source4leko:Maddow is one of, if not the best opinion journalists out there. Opinion journalist. Opinion.

It is not possible to be a good journalist without inserting opinion. The only way to present news without inserting opinion is to not weigh the two sides, giving us the BSABSVR meme. An "opinion" journalist would say Obama was born in the US, lay out all of the evidence and here are some idiots who claim otherwise and here is their stupid evidence. Your unbiased journalist would report "Obama claims he was born here, others claim he was not. You decide!" That's not journalism.

What you are missing is objectivity includes judgement. You can be objective and still judge.

Objectivenot influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion.

See that definition? You can have an "objective opinion." Maddow's opinions are based on facts. She lays out the facts. Fox News does not lay out the facts. Fox News presents made up facts, doctored/edited videos and only opinions. You will never hear a single opinion on Rachel Maddow's show that isn't preceded by a 5 minute segment laying out the factual basis for her conclusion. That is journalism.

AngryDragon:Objectivity (journalism)Objectivity is a significant principle of journalistic professionalism. Journalistic objectivity can refer to fairness, disinterestedness, factuality, and nonpartisanship, but most often encompasses all of these qualities.

And this is where the failure comes in. I really don't care how "partisan" your news website is, or your news tv show, or whatever you decode to print or broadcast and call "news". I only have one requirement - that you tell the truth.

Verifiable facts, proof, logical connections backed up by evidence, that sort of thing. This is why Rachel Maddow gets so many props and Fox Noise gets sh*t on, and deservedly so.Maddow is partisan, but she tells the truth, has the proof to back it up, and will correct any statement she makes and apologize on the air if necessary and warranted herself. Not a press release, not some crony or intern, but from her own lips on her own show.FoxNoise is partisan, lies out of their f*cking ass 24/7, is never called on it, and doesn't give a sh*t. In fact they are proud of it.

I don't care if they are objective, I just want the truth. That is why I use more than one source for my news and information. Even if each source tells me the the part of the truth that they want me to hear, I still get the whole truth from everyone.

lennavan:Source4leko: Calling her fair and balanced is as laughable as calling Fox News fair and balanced.

Equating Maddow to Fox News is as laughable as equating Fark.com to PBS.

Source4leko: Maddow is one of, if not the best opinion journalists out there. Opinion journalist. Opinion.

It is not possible to be a good journalist without inserting opinion. The only way to present news without inserting opinion is to not weigh the two sides, giving us the BSABSVR meme. An "opinion" journalist would say Obama was born in the US, lay out all of the evidence and here are some idiots who claim otherwise and here is their stupid evidence. Your unbiased journalist would report "Obama claims he was born here, others claim he was not. You decide!" That's not journalism.

What you are missing is objectivity includes judgement. You can be objective and still judge.

Objectivenot influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion.

See that definition? You can have an "objective opinion." Maddow's opinions are based on facts. She lays out the facts. Fox News does not lay out the facts. Fox News presents made up facts, doctored/edited videos and only opinions. You will never hear a single opinion on Rachel Maddow's show that isn't preceded by a 5 minute segment laying out the factual basis for her conclusion. That is journalism.

I only mentioned Fox News because of their absurd attempt at portraying events accurately. Her opinions are based on facts, that I entirely agree. But if she is considered the best journalist in America that makes me even more glad I dropped cable and get all of my news from the BBC and Al-Jazeera now.

If I were in congress, I wouldn't want insider trading laws either. I mean, I did what I had to do to get the most powerful legislature in the world, I'm supposed to get farking rich now, yes? If I can't get rich that way, you're going to force me to get buddy-buddy with some powerful lobbying group so I can get a big job after I'm out of congress. I mean, come on, no one in congress is a saint, be farking realistic.

Source4leko:lennavan: Source4leko: Calling her fair and balanced is as laughable as calling Fox News fair and balanced.

Equating Maddow to Fox News is as laughable as equating Fark.com to PBS.

Source4leko: Maddow is one of, if not the best opinion journalists out there. Opinion journalist. Opinion.

It is not possible to be a good journalist without inserting opinion. The only way to present news without inserting opinion is to not weigh the two sides, giving us the BSABSVR meme. An "opinion" journalist would say Obama was born in the US, lay out all of the evidence and here are some idiots who claim otherwise and here is their stupid evidence. Your unbiased journalist would report "Obama claims he was born here, others claim he was not. You decide!" That's not journalism.

What you are missing is objectivity includes judgement. You can be objective and still judge.

Objectivenot influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion.

See that definition? You can have an "objective opinion." Maddow's opinions are based on facts. She lays out the facts. Fox News does not lay out the facts. Fox News presents made up facts, doctored/edited videos and only opinions. You will never hear a single opinion on Rachel Maddow's show that isn't preceded by a 5 minute segment laying out the factual basis for her conclusion. That is journalism.

I only mentioned Fox News because of their absurd attempt at portraying events accurately. Her opinions are based on facts, that I entirely agree. But if she is considered the best journalist in America that makes me even more glad I dropped cable and get all of my news from the BBC and Al-Jazeera now.

I have to admit that I was a LOT more informed on current events happening around the world when I was in Afghanistan and watched BBC and Al-Jazeera pretty much every day. I die a little inside when I go somewhere and Fox News is on the TV.

lennavan:AngryDragon: Objectivity is a significant principle of journalistic professionalism. Journalistic objectivity can refer to fairness, disinterestedness, factuality, and nonpartisanship, but most often encompasses all of these qualities.

Partisan (political)In politics, a partisan is a committed member of a political party.

The backlash to President Obama's Oval Office Iraq speech has begun - and so far, one of the toughest critics is Rachel Maddow. http://www.mediaite.com/online/rachel-maddow-criticizes-obamas-kind-wo rds-for-bush/

If President Obama happened to glance at "The Rachel Maddow Show" last Monday, he might have winced.Ms. Maddow pretended to celebrate the passage of a health care overhaul bill in the House, calling it "potentially a huge generational win for the Democratic Party" - but then halted the triumphant music and called it an "electoral defeat."The Stupak amendment, she said, was "the biggest restriction on abortion rights in a generation." Then she wondered aloud about the consequences for Democrats "if they don't get women or anybody who's pro-choice to ever vote for them again." She returned to the subject the next four evenings in a row.

Maddow criticizes Obama's view on gay marriage Rachel Maddow made a comment on her MSNBC show - a comment which invited a backlash Maddow could not have expected."Obama is against what just happened" she said, to express that the pres ...